Officials hopeful airport takes off

Massport is throwing $32 million behind a multiyear effort to revitalize the long-struggling Worcester Regional Airport.

The goal is to equip Worcester with the best landing system on the market to make the airport more attractive to major airlines, who have shunned the hilltop facility for years. But, Massachusetts Port Authority officials contend, it's also about spurring economic development.

Massport, which owns and operates the airport, has authorized the money needed to install what's known as a Category III instrument landing system at Worcester's main runway. But the complex project is at least five years from completion. The first step is winning the support of the Federal Aviation Administration, which must sign off on all such upgrades.

Then Massport and its consultants, Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. and Vanasse Hangen Brustlin Inc., will spend three years making their case to a slew of local, state and federal boards and agencies, and to the public. Construction would take another two years.

“Because of its location near environmentally sensitive marshland and the Worcester water supply, the permitting process is more sophisticated,” said Thomas P. Glynn, Massport's chief executive.

The effort comes as Massport, city and state officials continue a very public campaign to woo JetBlue Airways Corp. to Worcester Regional Airport. JetBlue executives visited Worcester at Massport's urging and represent the only airline so far to express any interest in the small airport. JetBlue is in the final stages of evaluating whether to add Worcester to its list of 76 destinations, with daily flights to Florida.

“JetBlue has not made their commitment contingent to this work being completed,” Mr. Glynn noted. “We could be looking at JetBlue flights a year from now if the market is there.”

Worcester Regional Airport has been devoid of passenger planes for about a year, since Direct Air, a charter service, canceled flights and later filed for bankruptcy. Massport maintains that the airport will be an important asset in the future as Boston Logan International Airport reaches capacity. The thinking is that a better landing system would make the airport more competitive in the long term.

Efforts to upgrade Worcester with a new landing system have yet to trigger any major opposition. Though neighbors and environmentalists have concerns about the project's effects on the surrounding area, they expressed mostly confidence that Massport will follow procedures and take steps to contain the impact.

“I don't really see any red flags or alarms at this point,” said Paul R. Gunnerson, president of the Tatnuck Neighborhood Association. “I believe they know they're under a microscope to do it right.”

The airport lies on the Worcester-Leicester line. In Leicester, three town boards have voted to support efforts to bring JetBlue and other airlines to Worcester.

Douglas A. Belanger, chairman of Leicester's Board of Selectmen, acknowledged that not everyone in town would be pleased with the noise and traffic that could result from changes at the airport, but he said “I think their issues will be addressed.”

“As the city grows and succeeds, it has more positive than negative effect on the town of Leicester,” he added.

Even with broad support for the project, permitting will not be easy. Massport needs approvals from the FAA, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the National Environmental Policy Act, the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act, the state Department of Environmental Protection, the state Division of Fisheries and Wildlife, the Worcester Department of Public Works & Parks, the Worcester Conservation Commission and the Leicester Conservation Commission.

The project will require a lot of digging in the runway area, where workers will install new light towers and build a taxiway. “There is a significant amount of bringing soil for fill (and) electrical work,” said Sam Sleiman, Massport's director of capital programs and environmental affairs.

The concern with a project like this — especially because it will happen up a hill from the city's reservoirs — is erosion. Philip D. Guerin, the city's director of environmental systems, described what happened decades ago, when the runway was being constructed with relatively little oversight. Sediment ran off the construction site and into Lynde Brook Reservoir. The reservoir became so polluted that it had to be closed for five years while the city relied on other bodies of water.

“That's our historical guide for what can happen,” Mr. Guerin said. “So we pay close attention to what they do up there.”

There are many ways to control sediment, including directing runoff into man-made basins, and using soil types that are less prone to erosion.

Worcester is home to several endangered and threatened species — including certain kinds of salamanders, sparrows and ferns — that also could be affected by a construction project at the airport, noted Colin M.J. Novick, executive director of the Greater Worcester Land Trust.

“While people may not be excited about salamanders in general, there are a number of unusual species that exist in the city of Worcester,” he said. “We tend to be fairly protective that they've managed to survive this long in an urbanized environment.”

Massport officials said the public will have several opportunities to comment on the project during the permitting process.

Category, or CAT III, systems as they're known in the industry, help pilots land planes in the thickest fog conditions. Worcester Regional Airport has a fog problem because of its high elevation. CAT III systems involve special lights that make a runway more visible, and instruments that send signals from a runway to a plane.

“If the airport is equipped, if the airplane is equipped, the airplane can basically land itself in almost literally zero visibility,” said Michael Boyd, chairman of Boyd Group International, an aviation consulting firm in Colorado.

Not all planes and pilots are certified to use CAT III systems; JetBlue pilots are certified. Airline spokeswoman Tamara Young said 30 of the 76 airports JetBlue serves have CAT III landing systems.

T.F. Green Airport in Rhode Island, which installed a CAT III system 18 years ago, is served by half a dozen well-known airlines. Patti Goldstein, vice president of public affairs, said it's hard to determine whether the landing system was a factor in the airlines' decisions to come to Providence.

“It would be difficult to draw a correlation,” she said, “but anything you can do to improve safety is always a plus.”

Mr. Boyd, who is familiar with Worcester from his career in the aviation industry, was skeptical that the installation of such a system would help transform the city's languishing airport.

“JetBlue might have three flights a day,” he said. “You spend all this millions and millions for one airline that has three flights a day — you have to ask yourself, is it worth the economic benefit?”

The $32 million project is part of $36 million Massport plans to spend on Worcester's airport over the next five years to improve things like the terminal roof and heating and cooling systems. The budget for Worcester represents just 3 percent of Massport's $1 billion capital plan.

The capital projects will not be funded with tax dollars. Massport's revenue comes from landing fees and other charges.

Currently, the agency is losing most of the $5 million it spends every year to operate the airport.

“We think we're investing in an airport, but we're also investing in the economy,” Massport CEO Glynn said of the CAT III project. “We're losing $4 million a year on the current airport. If we start closing that gap over time, people would be very happy and think it is a good investment.”